Chris Stringer on Human Evolution, Recent Discoveries, and their Implications
Вставка
- Опубліковано 8 бер 2023
- Professor Chris Stringer is the Research Leader in Human Origins at the London Natural History Museum. His early research was on the relationship of Neanderthals and early modern humans in Europe, but through his work on the ‘Recent African Origin’ model for modern human origins, collaborating with archaeologists, dating specialists, and geneticists, he works on reconstructing the evolution of modern humans globally.
He’s excavated at sites in Britain and abroad, directed the Ancient Human Occupation of Britain project from 2001 to 2013, and is currently co-directing the Pathways to Ancient Britain project. He has published over 250 scientific papers and his recent books include The Complete World of Human Evolution (2011, with Peter Andrews), The Origin of Our Species (2011), and Britain: One Million Years of the Human Story (2014, with Rob Dinnis), and Our Human Story (2018, with Louise Humphrey).
Talks originally given on 25th Jan 2022.
I highly respect Professor Stringer says that he 'used' to believe such & such way, but is now considering new theories. The excitement in human evolution is new data and new implications!
And this IS a basic tenet of science. He’s not a big laudable exception adhering to that principle when he’s considering a new hypothesis.
Much more complex than we imagine and will get more so I think. Thank you for your hard work Dr. Stringer
Excellent as always, Professor Stringer. Thank you for your time and efforts..
What a fantastic summation of human evolution. Thanks to you both!
I think the guy should introduce his as Professor Chris Stringer, he is an absolute legend!
Nobody I have seen explains evolution with the same clarity as Stringer.
Proof is the trump card of "clarity".
DNA does ... and Stringer has now stated that Out of Africa could have never happened.
@@Deep.Purple - He *just said* "out of Africa". (The oldest living DNA found today is in the Khoe-San people of southern Africa.)
I love seeing the new discoveries, it blows my mind these people go back 150k+ years
It is so mind blowing that the dates are likely way off. Sort of like if you see a statue in time Square and someone try to convince you it was just a Boulder that eroded over millions of years to form that shape.
imagine if it was real .
wow. fascinating stuff, brilliantly, simply presented.
When I was at school in the 1950s, the ancestors of modern humans were depicted in books as generic 'cavemen'. How exciting that, during my lifetime, the story of human evolution has become so much more interesting! This was a brilliant update on the latest thinking, which I appreciate ... but I'm sure that over the next 2-5 years, today's text books will have to be re-written all over again! R (Australia)
Really puts the victorian era into perspective eh
Wonderful lecture. Thank you Dr Stringer
Very interesting, thank you.
Thank you, Oxford Archaeological Society, for keeping the rest of us up-to-date with the latest synthesis from Prof Stringer. New information and novel analyses keep coming out, and it is good to have a frequent, knowledgeable synthesis available. I still want to ask him what he thinks of the hypothesis that Denisovans, Homo longi, and Homo erectus are the same lineage of humans. So far, only DNA of one, and fossils of the others-but they’re in the same SE Asia areas.
The DNA of Neanderthal and Denisovan was 15-16ths human and 1-16 chimpanzee. There may be the dawning realization that the ape-men were not human ancestors; they were the result of human-ape hybridization.
@@Mdebacle Utter garbage. You provide no evidence for this ludicrous claim, because there is none.
@@Mdebacle - You have a 98+ match with Bonobo / Chimpanzee DNA because our lines split more recently than with any other Apes. As a fraction, that = 98/100 %. This because of evolution, not hybridization.
Thanks for actually acknowledging the Australia question so many others ignore!
They all walk around the wrong way, and gravity puts their heads under massive blood pressure. That is probably why so many have very red faces and talk funny.
Thank you. Fascinating.
content starts 7:25, talk starts 11:30
This has now been fixed!
Yes! Finally, at 10:25mins., someone has the right idea.
I am thinking of doing a course on Evolution of Human ehaviour at Ox.
Having Neanderthal DNA in me was noticed by the dentists 30 years ago, telling me my front teeth have a thicker basin. 20 years ago, a nose doctor told me my nose cavities are huge… like cathedral in Kolon. I have resistance to viruses, including HIV and Covid. I got infected many times, but I had only slight fever unnoticeable. I also hibernate in the winter and gain weight from eating too much. But in the summertime I work a lot physically with my big and heavy artwork over 30 pounds each juggling like in a circus. I can loose 30 lbs in few weeks. Skin is hanging. My testicles are size of chicken eggs. I don’t know if this will help you in your research.
Bogoslowsky
My genetic descendants, all come from the region of river Volga in Russia from today’s Volgograd, a.k.a., Stalingrad and Saratov . The area called the great steps of Russia. Everyone in my family is over 6 foot tall, blonde, blue eyes, and the redheads. But not me.
My mother’s father was Ukrainian from Don river region .
I have no allergies to milk I am addicted to warm goat 🐐 milk and sourdough bread.
I do not remmenber where I heard it that people with Neanderthals DNA where not doing well with covid, more deadly to them.
Today I found out that some Neanerthals had red hair and freckles.
@@badfairy9554 In “Tibetan book of the dead”, composed by Buddhist monk in the 12th century one particular concept is explored repeatedly.
The concept of “in between”.
Between one state of the mind, and the next level of consciousness.
In general, the book is an instruction manual on -“how to behave after physical death”.
“Tibetan book of the dead” is a daily instructions for a proper behavior in Tibetan society.
I feel my life is constantly in between.
I feel yesterday is miles away, and there is an infinite abyss between now and the future.
I feel I am riding a horse with two, or three spare horses behind.
It was a dream I had when I was a teenager.
I remember this dream 🛌
Sleeping is my favorite thing to do after boiling, hot Jacuzzi outdoors in the freezing winter.
#Bogoslowsky 🦁🤴
#bogoslowskyfunpage
#bogoslowskyartschool
#twomenfightingtrend
#cactusia
#gravitationalism
#yonification
#Богословский
.
Can we obtain dates of the age range of Homo sapien fossils so we can determine how long older individuals lived vs Neanderthal relatives lived?
I have not seen any comments on whether the Neanderthal DNA in the Sapiens genome is more present in the mitochondrial DNA, or on the Y chromosome: that is, was the interbreeding mainly from female Neanderthals or male - or equal? Or is my understanding of genetics faulty, and this deduction cannot be made?
I've been preaching a pan African origin since I was a kid in the mid 1970's.
My essays received decent grades for being well written...but my conclusions and theory were... essentially...ridiculed by my teachers.
Vindication is sweet in my old age.
Well, that’s because you wrote it with mostly with racist intentions and no evidence, so they weren’t wrong for that.
@@Talleyhoooo....?
@@Talleyhoooo - What is that snarkiness supposed to mean? Did you know the young @darrinwebber4077 ? If not, how could you possibly have even a _GUESS_ why he wrote his papers the way he did??? A kid having an "out of Africa" intuition is NOT racist, it is the truth.
Prof. Stinger, please coment on "Udo" excarveted by Madlaine Böhme and her group in Bavaria
Commenting for algorithm
No magical morphing monkeys.
@@JungleJargon - Just the science of evolution here!
@@MossyMozart Evolution isn't science.
He is a simply following institutional knowledge and still looks at other species and even older humans as “primitive”. This is especially apparent when he talks about art and it’s human origins and that (even) Neanderthals couldn’t have art. Or at least he thought was very unlikely Neanderthals had it.
We have a number of art pieces that were most likely of Neanderthal origin and now we have the art found in the rising star cave which almost unequivocally created by Homo Naledi 200,000 years before most of the other cave art.
Art means nothing. Survival skills were everything. Which is the most important, the art that hangs in a gallery, or the skills that built the building the art is in?
@@FortescueGimlet Every human has a degree in life, teaching others, and doing research, but some are stupid enough to pay thousands to get a little stamp to back up there learning, even it doesn't make them one bit smarter than any other human.
@@thomaswayneward That'll be fcuk all then?
Art means you have surplus time and energy for abstract thought and reflection.
This would suggest that he or she who created the art had all their survival bases covered fairly well at that particular time.
Neanderthal art has been found in at least 3 caves in Spain, dated from before 66,000 ya, 20,000 years before Sapiens made it to Spain.
It seems to me that all ancestors would have interbred if given the opportunity.
yeah, naw😂
@Notmehimorthem - Would *you* have gotten cozy with an Erectus or Chimpanzee female?
Study #linguistics to understand functions of your own mind Illogical to tell others how you feel/they should #feel #Bogoslowsky
One question I would like answered.How did homo sapiens produce so many offspring that we now number in the billions?Was it a lack of predators?
It is a real problem for evolutionists. Models have shown if dates like 160k years ago were true for first humans the. The population today would be..10,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000
That isn't a typo
thank god for disease, famine, and wars@@jaysmith6863
@@jaysmith6863 you forget disease, famine and environmental disasters.
@@brentmckernan4384 Nope the model includes all of that. It is called a population model for a reason.
@@jaysmith6863 - Citation needed.
I speak and read Polish I lived in Poland for eight years, and I have many friends in my opinion there’s Amber bear is a fake. I am a very skillful faker in high school I was making fake Byzantium icons and making some good money with it. The article doesn’t describe, the circumstances of those artifacts by the way, there are many many artifacts in this article but thank you for this reference
#Bogoslowsky 🦁🤴
I did not hear much about the making of clothes. The neanderthals were physically adapted to survive in cold weather. By adapting clothes to the weather modern humans could have had an enormous advantage, especially during summer.
You mean "winter"
"could have"? Of course early homo were good at making clothes and adapting to local climate. Space suits inspired by Eskimo and Inuit clothing.
@HvdHaghen - Unfortunately, fabric and garments do not fossilize, but decay over time.
However, Neanderthals were as smart as we are and though more adapted to the colder weather, would have needed protection against zero degree temperatures. They would have noticed that clothing and bedding kept them warmer in the winter and dryer in the rain. Wrapping their feet in hides allowed them to prevent frostbite and laugh at sharp rocks. They also made string and could have woven said string into a fabric. No needles that I know of are associated with them, but they could have used their sharp cutting tools to make strips of leather to use as ties.
Likewise, Homo erectus, the longest lived and most successful of our ancestors, were smart, too. Why not use hides to protect themselves from weather, too, and to provide a comfortable place to sleep? Hey, even my _cat_ knows that it is warmer and cozier to sleep curled up on a blanket than a bare floor. I don't think we give all those folks of the past the credit they deserve by just thinking of them as primitive cave-dwelling "ape-men".
In short .. 'evolution' (the real process not the comic book presentations of it) is not - quite - what it was (once thought to be or taught as). And that, dear souls, is genuine science at work. However, the same flaw arises - constantly, if incidentally: 'us' and 'them'; the spread of sapient humans (aka, us) is mapped (fairly well) in the mix with (them) other very successful 'human' humans whether in Neanderthal types or others, less well demonstrated in Jebel Irhoud, etc, chiefly across the (relatively easy to traverse) areas outside Africa, not so much in (the often far from easy terrain of) Africa (yes even thousands upon thousands of 'years' ago).
What then, the question must arise - yet again, makes man a human (male, female or whatever today's definition may be)? Posture, size in hats, use of various tools, the capacity for moral reason or .. what?
So a long-term tree-dwelling human may be as much of a moral reasoner as an occasional cave-using human, also a pokey-stick user as a carefully sharpened edge flint-maker, a digit counter and a cognitive summer-upper, measuring and tying with woven strands of dry grass or reed or by using a stick with a variable length of flax or wool, an accidental dinner burner or a willful burner of an enemies fields ..
;o)
Humanity used to be defined as "tool makers", but Jane Goodall blew that notion away with her Chimpanzee research. Since then, they have observed many animals creating and using tools, even Corvids. And they have found stone tools with Homo habilis fossils.
It used to be defined as having a knowledge of our mortality, but Elephants well know about death and they have found burials amongst the Neanderthals and possibly other groups (it is one hypothesis that Berger puts forward for Homo naledi).
It used to be defined as speech, but Neanderthals have the structures and genes that would have allowed them to speak. They have found that many animals can communicate by vocalizations, hand gestures, facial expressions, dance moves (bees). Would you say that deaf people who communicate in those ways are not human? No, you wouldn't. So, Sapiens are not the only critters who can speak and communicate.
It used to be defined as the manipulation of fire and therefore cooking, but hearths and bones of cooked fish and land animals have been discovered that are nearly 1,000,000 years old, giving "fish sticks" a whole new meaning.
Radar O'Reilly said emphatically in an episode of _M.A.S.H._ that "Dogs are people, too!" So, the definition keeps shifting every time another critter proves we are not the only ones with _X_ ability. In our hubris, we are determined to stay ahead, come hell or high water, but have failed so far. ^_^
It has been stated that different types of hominids mixed with each other. Starting at 250000 years ago they could have traveled around Africa's coast since then moving one meter a month. They moved, they met, they dated!
its true what you say but 12 million years before the prehumans were in europe but when the going got tough they went to africa . so its time scales.
Maybe about 5,000 years to the birth of Noah.
From the skeletons., it appears neanderthals were taller than humans, and maybe stronger by a significant measure. Is it possible some of these survived into relatively historic times, to fuel the stories of "giants"? This would help explain the megalithic constructions around the world, also.
However, you use a conventional map of the world, as it constitutes today. I suspect the modern arrangement of continents, oceans and orientations is less than 5,000 years old. The world of the Neanderthals and Denisovans, along with all other variations of early humans, looked so different it would be unrecognizable to modern humans.
No.
@@Talleyhoooo "No" what? That we DON'T live in a "steady state universe" or are you answering my first question? I have known people who closely resemble some of the examples shown in the video, so the idea those genes, from neanderthals and other early hominids, have survived to modern times.
Articulate yourself!
@@TheAnarchitek you do realize that the entire genome of the human species has been identified?.. Nothing that you’ve said reflects what’s been discovered…
The anchor and center of gravity for the most influential evolution focused scientists apparently continues to be "out of Africa". Nonetheless, Stringer might have opened as much as a ten percent window for at least questioning the theory.
Have you seen other, equally- (or more?) compelling '"Origin Theories", @W IV ?
@@neclark08 I have not seen any theories that are highly compelling, including "out of Africa", therefore I am more impressed when origin theorists maintain even an ever so slight open mindedness on the subject.
Thank you, Oxford Archaeological Society, for keeping the rest of us up-to-date with the latest synthesis from Prof Stringer. New information and novel analyses keep coming out, and it is good to have a frequent, knowledgeable synthesis available. I still want to ask him what he thinks of the hypothesis that Denisovans, Homo longi, and Homo erectus are the same lineage of humans. So far, only DNA of one, and fossils of the others-but they’re in the same SE Asia areas.
@@wiv2631 I’m confused by your comment, it sounds like you don’t accept the “out of Africa” hypothesis? I hesitate in asking that, since I don’t want to assume that you’re rejecting the DNA evidence, or if you’re just curious about ancestral lineages that may have been lost?
@@Talleyhoooo I do regard it as a hypothesis, just not as a certainty. I don't offhand reject DNA studies, only I don't think our capability to sequence genomes goes far enough back to lend itself to certainty. There is a reason Stringer would go from 100% certainty to -10% or less.
Delicious...
Are we really going on about this 'all humans are one species' nonsense?
Prove otherwise.
@@JungleJargon What criteria do we use for taxonomic classification of species?
@@JungleJargon Let's educate ourselves, shall we?
How many species of elephant inhabit the world today?
Perhaps some of us are unaware that we are on a planet with two different groups of sentient beings. One group is autochthonous ie naturally occurring. The other group suddenly appeared six to ten thousand years ago and is not. Quite simple.
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣😂😂😂😂😂😂
how can mutations really evolve anything
By introducing novelty
Some mutations create advantage which is retained and propagated, some mutations result in disadvantage which is discarded.
@Kraig StClair Mutations are copying errors, the average rate of mutations in humans is 3%, if you marry your sister (1st degree incest) the rate of mutations increases to 6%. Marrying your 2nd cousin is ideal because it produces the highest fertility with the lowest rate of copying errors. Animals show no memory of who their kin are, incest is normal among animals.
@@dreamdiction yeah one in a million maybe
@@raysalmon6566 yeah, evolution is slow.
Atheist archaeologists love using terms like "suggesting", "most probably", "seem to", "more likely" and even "must have". And then say that evolution is a "fact"! Right.
It's never wise to use absolute statements. Especially in science.
@jaybennett236 - Attend to @kusaselihlengubane8984 's statement and open your eyes to the fact that there are _BILLIONS_ of pieces of evidence and data that show evolution is conclusive.
MANY theists fully support evolution and the geological history of our planet. There is only one small schism that does not, young Earth creationists (YEC). Don't be one of them.
Stringer now says that "out of africa" couldn't have happened.. did you read that?
That's not what he says here.
There is only one homo sapien branch of human's out of many branches, because of the evolution of the unique quality of 'meditative wisdom', that evolved as pineal gland. There must be an explanation how homo sapiens perfected this evolution.
Is any of this in full articulation upon discovery?
There are absolutely no magical morphing monkeys.
40000 year old Neanderthal painting records the generations of Noah in lines of dots in Spain
This is dishonest creationist drivel, of course. Noah is a mythical character, invented tens of thousands of years after Neandertal extinction.
Cool upfront artwork, kudos to the artist who live that long ago who was able to capture the likeness.
If you dig up the graveyard in NYC, you will find the same diversity in fossils. Even look at modern day living people, you will see it. Everything from little people to what some might call giants, 8 ft teenagers.
Title of video seemed to imply I would have seen some objective evidence of evolution.
Guess you missed the largest DNA study ever completed in Human Evolution magazine, 1981 Stoeckle and Thaler.
Notice how he uses the words "We dont know", "it seems to be", "maybe", "likely". People critique the date because carbon 14 dating isn't valid past like 50k years. It has shown to also be wildly inaccurate.
Knowing how we are today i'm sure we wiped out the neanderthals
They seemed to have a problem with genetic entropy.
lmao, keep saying or suggesting OOA, despite the fact that any version of events that is still tenable and permits, merely referentially, the application of that label, is entirely different from the version of events to which that label has been applied for decades, and thus betrays the sense it has taken on, and which is an integral part of the general understanding of its meaning. It is thus misleading to use language which might evoke, even invertedly, the original hypothesis without explicitly distinguishing and rejecting it. Sadly, what I see far more often resembles an attempt to sweep under the rug the fact that any version of OOA-i.e., that ( _ⅰ_ ) modern _h.s.s._ arose in Africa, prior to emigration, ( _ⅱ_ ) resembling, phenotypically, modern S.S. Africans, and ( _ⅲ_ ) a subset of that fully-modern population which departed Africa is ancestral to all non-Africans, ( _ⅳ_ ) evolving traits typical of European and East-Asian phenotypes only afterwards. Any _homo_ population which evolved in Africa and is plausibly ancestral to modern _h.s.s._ could only have been some form of _erectus_ or pre- _h.s._ , _erectus_ successor, and all _h.s._ DNA present in the genomes of any contemporary population of humans derives from _h.s.s._ populations which arose in Eurasia, which either coincide with, or were close relatives of, populations traditionally identified as _Cro-Magnon_ , and which, phenotypically resembled modern Europeans. Accordingly, any _homo_ DNA in the genomes of contemporary human populations which is not derived from those Eurasian _h.s.s._ has as its ancestral source a non- _h.s._ species in _homo_ and constitutes admixture acquired through interbreeding.¹
────────────────────
1. Examples include non-trivial admixture from _h. neanderthalensis_ in non-S.S. Africans, the additional, and significant, _Denisovan_ admixture found in the genomes of modern Australoid and Melanesian populations, and the up to 20% "ghost" admixture (likely from an _erectus_ -like species native to S.S. Africa) in S.S. African populations, the latter likely constituting the only portion of the modern S.S. genome that completely evolved in S.S. Africa, with the remaining ≥80% being derived from modern Eurasian _h.s.s._ migrating South into S.S. Africa and interbreeding with females from the native _h. erectus_ populations (the lack of native yDNA haplogroups among modern S.S. Africans is likely explained by interbreeding pairs being composed almost exclusively of males from the Eurasian _h.s.s._ and females from the S.S. _erectus_ populations).
This ghost dna was only tested in a handful of tribes vs myriads of tribes in the surrounding area, one more genetically diverse to the other. And among those tested, it was like 1 or 2 people who had 20 percent, the average is about 10 percent. Humanity is 99.99 percent the same.
We came from Africa, ydna/mtdna ages and migrations path matches this and were all of one stock with a diverse spectrum.
When The Smithsonian , Whips Out The Red- Haired(Mostly Male) NEPHILIM( Double Rows Of Teeth,etc) I Know They R Serious! The Catalina Islands Ones & South Point Ohio, Etc Ones , Too.. 😜🖖 😉
Well, as long as it is human it doesn’t matter.
What a laugh from Wikipedia 😂😂😂
B S
Evolutionism is nonsense.
🐂💩.
Magical morphing monkeys is nonsense.
If it has a Sloping Forehead and a Mid Tarsal Break across the center of it's Feet ? Then it is a Sasquatch Person , no matter what they name it.
Show me one.
@@JungleJargon Go to the nearest State or National Forest ( Because that is where They live )
@@jughound7923 You go and bring back the evidence for me to believe.
@@JungleJargon C'mon Up Here to Northwestern Michigan ! ( I could not even move when I saw that Thing )
Isn't it a Coincidence that the only President with a second hand " Wild Man " Story to share ? Just happens to be the same Guy to sign the Parks & Recreation Act into Being ? ( Theodore Roosevelt )
Because that is where the Sasquatch live. ( Also Military & Public Lands )
Anything I present as Evidence ( Though I do not want anything to do with these Things ) You will only disregard as a Hoax.
So prove it for Yourself.
( Warning - They somehow KNOW Your Intentions. But calling on the Name of Jesus makes Them retreat for now. ( I do not know what will happen after the Nuclear Strike ? Will these Things go CRAZY ? )
@@jughound7923 - You are the one making the outrageous claim. It is up to YOU to provide the evidence.
August 2023: ""ancient ape from Türkiye challenges the story of human origins."" We came out of Europe. We came out of Europe. The human evolutionary tree is just a bunch of cxxx or sxxx or more politely total baloney.
Humans are not monkeys.
@@JungleJargon - I know plenty of humans who are monkeys! ^_^
Nothing human has ever came out of Africa..
Humans live in Africa so they probably came out of Africa.
BS
Evolutionism is nonsense.
My “religion” is truth. If it’s not true, I don’t want any part of it. The geology that we have of a number of mega sequences of consecutive water deposited sediment layers over a mile deep with fossils in them around the world on every continent necessitates a global flood catastrophe. I know that hurts the belief of every other made up alternate narrative. It just happens to be a fact that we are all the descendants of those who stepped off of the Ark in the area around Mesopotamia.
You can’t argue with known human history or ancient calendars going back only 5,000 years. The ancient civilizations are all descended from Noah who had sixteen grandsons that became the sixteen ancient the civilizations each with their own paternal haplogroup lineage. The Bible is the only text that outlines the following Table of Nations.
1) Tubal Italy K,
2) Javan Greek sea people T,
3) Tiras Thracians L,
4) Magog Asian O,
5) Meshek Siberians N,
6) Madai Medes Q,
7) Gomer Europeans R,
8) Arphaxad Arabs Hebrews I&J,
9) Elam Elamites H,
10) Asshur Assyrians G,
11) Aram Arameans F
12) Lud Lydians F2,
13) Cush Cushites A B & C.
14) Phut early Phoenicians E1,
15) Canaan Canaanites E2,
16) Mitzrayim Egyptians E3,
D is likely the Sinite tribe from Canaan.
C is the descendants of Nimrod since they can’t possibly be from anyone else.
Neanderthals are Japhethites and Denisovans are a mix of Japhethites and Hamites, not Semitic. It shows up on DNA maps and charts. Every grandson of Noah and their descendants have their own paternal Y chromosome haplogroup lineage! I can name all sixteen of them like I just did and give you each of their haplogroups!
The evolutionary out of Africa claim is exactly backwards since the *oldest* progenitor is Japheth the ancestor of Eurasians then the Semitic populations of Shem and then the Hamitic African is the youngest progenitor with their eldest sons connecting the three different families descended from the three sons of Noah.
It took me a while to understand that the evolutionary claim is assuming that SNP markers are being gained forming the stair steps out of Africa when *the reality is* that the original SNP markers cited are in fact being lost forming the opposite stair steps out of West Asia as known human history shows.
The stair step out of Africa claim has to be addressed because the SNP markers are *real* evidence but the evolutionary assumption is exactly backwards.
The correct view requires that the older most original genomes of the Japhethites be connected to the Semitics by way of the eldest son of Shem which is Arphaxad (IJ). Arphaxad’s descendants can share the (IJK) SNP marker with the descendants of his uncle Japheth while the descendants of his younger brothers do not share that same (IJK) SNP.
You have to root the tree with Japheth the oldest son of Noah and then the oldest son of Shem (IJ Arphaxad) and then Elam and then Asshur and then the youngest brothers Aram and Lud. So you have to begin with the *most original* Y chromosome of Noah’s oldest son Japheth and then the changes occur in the people who were born later. It’s not necessarily a stair step of descendency. It’s changes in the Y chromosome with time. *Arphaxad isn’t descended from Japheth.* He just shares a marker with his uncle that his father used to have when he was born. Shem then lost the marker when Arphaxad’s younger brothers were born.
The descendants of Shem are then connected to the descendants of Ham by way of Nimrod the King (C) the the eldest son of Cush who is the eldest son of Ham. So the Hamitic CF (xD&E) paternal haplogroup SNP marker was lost to the *odd ones out* and less original younger brothers and cousins verifying the Table of Nations outlined in Genesis.💥 Learn the Bible before trying to learn anything else.
It’s also noteworthy that the D paternal haplogroup lines up with the E2 haplogroup of Canaan which is his son’s tribe of Sinim the Biblical namesake of China. So the only Hamitic haplogroups outside of Africa are the C of Nimrod and the D of the Canaanite tribe of Sinim which is still there in Andaman, Tibetan, Mongolian, Chinese and Japanese areas today.
Sorry can you repeat, I don't speak meaningless gibberish.
@@davidfiler7439 You don’t know anything about Haplogroups.
@@JungleJargon A haplogroup is a genetic population group of people who share a common ancestor on the patriline or the matriline. Top-level haplogroups are assigned letters of the alphabet, and deeper refinements consist of additional number and letter combinations. Your point was?
@@davidfiler7439 How about SNPs. You can look that up too.
@@JungleJargon No, your done. Goodbye.